Why the hate for MotoGP?

MotoGP Forum

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
stiefel said:
Bit dissappointed with this. There's a difference between people caring enough for the sport to voice concern about its direction and what you call "dumping on/hating". I get the sense you're advocating a norm of 'thou shalt not criticise'.





I'd also be careful with the comparisons between motogp and WSBK. I know there's a lot of people saying stuff like 'the sbk racing is better, I'll only watch that in the future' etc., and that's what seems to have set you off in the first place. That's something different than considerations about the feasability of having these 2 seperate series and the conditions necessary to maintain that situation, or reasons for changing it. Some of the things I read in this thread almost appear to say 'don't complain about motogp, wsbk is just as bad or worse'. That's not a valid argument.
Click to expand...



I think you are misunderstanding me. I believe there is plenty of room to criticize MotoGP, and plenty of reason to. The sport has one main failing - it has become financially unsustainable - and two parties are to blame. The manufacturers, for fixing the rules to create a barrier to entry using costs, and Dorna, for being such an utter failure at raising sponsorship for the series. I think it is vital that the sport is criticized for these two failures, and I'm working no a couple of articles about this, to be written over the next couple of weeks.



What I do find curious is the favorable comparison to WSBK all the time, a comparison that is not backed up by numbers. MotoGP is massively more popular than World Superbikes, as a quick glance at the numbers will show. My main beef is not with criticism of MotoGP, but with the odd hypocrisy of saying "WSBK is way better" and then not watching the series or commenting on it. If people think WSBK is better, they have an odd way of showing it.



The comparison with WSBK is all the more relevant because of the charges being made against MotoGP. Manipulation, favoritism, corruption, all these are claimed as reasons to stop watching MotoGP, yet the Flammini brothers make Silvio Berlusconi look like Mother Teresa. The argument is not that you shouldn't complain about MotoGP because WSBK is worse, the argument is that you can't complain about MotoGP and then hold up WSBK as a shining example of the right way to do things, when WSBK is worse in specifically the areas people are complaining about. It's like people condemning Hitler for the genocide and then holding Joe Stalin as an example of how to run a country.



I'm all in favor of people complaining. But if you are complaining, then you should first know what you are talking about, and second follow up your actions with deeds.
 
Kropotkin said:
I'm all in favor of people complaining. But if you are complaining, then you should first know what you are talking about, and second follow up your actions with deeds.
Click to expand...



Krop, this line about sums it up (IMO)



I have long watched and participated in a number of discussions regarding MGP and often people will compare to WSBK and will hold it p as a sanctity of virtue (by comparison to MGP) all the while ignoring the myriad rumblings of preferential treatments of specific riders, factories, tracks etc.



In many of these discussions people comment about the current tyre situation in MGP but seem to overlook often reported issues with the Pirelli tyres that are said to be as dangerous (and some I have read say more dangerous) than any MGP tyres etc.



People seem to think that WSBK is a closer series and yet we only see a small number of winners across a year, but still people say it is better.



As I said in my earlier post, I MUST see the results and analyse them from one series, whereas the second series I can easily go a day or so without seeking any information. This shows me that for me at least there is but one series.
 
Gaz said:
In many of these discussions people comment about the current tyre situation in MGP but seem to overlook often reported issues with the Pirelli tyres that are said to be as dangerous (and some I have read say more dangerous) than any MGP tyres etc.
Click to expand...



Tires are assigned at random by computer in MotoGP. Tires are hand-picked by Pirelli techs in WSBK. It is rumored that there is a stack of tires at the back of the Pirelli truck that have been lying around for a couple of years. These are rumored to be kept for 'special supply' to riders at the whim of the tire supplier or organizer. I have never been able to get anyone to confirm this on the record.
 
Kropotkin said:
I think you are misunderstanding me. I believe there is plenty of room to criticize MotoGP, and plenty of reason to. The sport has one main failing - it has become financially unsustainable - and two parties are to blame. The manufacturers, for fixing the rules to create a barrier to entry using costs, and Dorna, for being such an utter failure at raising sponsorship for the series. I think it is vital that the sport is criticized for these two failures, and I'm working no a couple of articles about this, to be written over the next couple of weeks.



What I do find curious is the favorable comparison to WSBK all the time, a comparison that is not backed up by numbers. MotoGP is massively more popular than World Superbikes, as a quick glance at the numbers will show. My main beef is not with criticism of MotoGP, but with the odd hypocrisy of saying "WSBK is way better" and then not watching the series or commenting on it. If people think WSBK is better, they have an odd way of showing it.



The comparison with WSBK is all the more relevant because of the charges being made against MotoGP. Manipulation, favoritism, corruption, all these are claimed as reasons to stop watching MotoGP, yet the Flammini brothers make Silvio Berlusconi look like Mother Teresa. The argument is not that you shouldn't complain about MotoGP because WSBK is worse, the argument is that you can't complain about MotoGP and then hold up WSBK as a shining example of the right way to do things, when WSBK is worse in specifically the areas people are complaining about. It's like people condemning Hitler for the genocide and then holding Joe Stalin as an example of how to run a country.



I'm all in favor of people complaining. But if you are complaining, then you should first know what you are talking about, and second follow up your actions with deeds.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.



I can only speak for myself regarding the following: I complain plenty about the sport. My main problem can be subsumed under the ever increasing commercialization of the sport in favour of rider- and technological competition, it's results, the context and institutions that gave rise to it in the first place, and what it will mean for the sport in the long term. I don't see WSBK as the promised land, in fact I rarely watch it nowadays, for the same reason I watch moto2 and moto1 a lot less than I use to watch 250 and 125: it doesn't have the same technological appeal to me. The bikes are just don't appear as much thoroughbred racing machines. It also doesn't help that it is quite clear that few if any of the riders could hack it in motogp. I am also well aware of the role of Pirelli. Moreover, I dislike the performance balancing regulations, it just always feels akward to me (as it does in WTCC).



At the same time, I do think that WSBK and Motogp are competing over the same resources, and every step they take in motopg has to take that into account. It's not as easy as saying your series is the pinnacle and then it simply is. So, yeah, I do refer to WSBK on occasion, simply because I think it's wrong to neglect that when discussing the future of motogp.
 
stiefel said:
Fair enough.



I can only speak for myself regarding the following: I complain plenty about the sport. My main problem can be subsumed under the ever increasing commercialization of the sport in favour of rider- and technological competition, it's results, the context and institutions that gave rise to it in the first place, and what it will mean for the sport in the long term. I don't see WSBK as the promised land, in fact I rarely watch it nowadays, for the same reason I watch moto2 and moto1 a lot less than I use to watch 250 and 125: it doesn't have the same technological appeal to me. The bikes are just don't appear as much thoroughbred racing machines. It also doesn't help that it is quite clear that few if any of the riders could hack it in motogp. I am also well aware of the role of Pirelli. Moreover, I dislike the performance balancing regulations, it just always feels akward to me (as it does in WTCC).



At the same time, I do think that WSBK and Motogp are competing over the same resources, and every step they take in motopg has to take that into account. It's not as easy as saying your series is the pinnacle and then it simply is. So, yeah, I do refer to WSBK on occasion, simply because I think it's wrong to neglect that when discussing the future of motogp.
Click to expand...



A good argument. But really, the heart of the matter is the definition of the word 'pinnacle'. People have their own ideas of what they mean by pinnacle, but use the word as if it was universally obvious what it means. But the highest mountain in the Netherlands is a pretty disappointing spectacle, yet that too is the 'pinnacle' of the Netherlands (who have to share it with Germany and Belgium, but that's just the way it is).
 
Kropotkin said:
Tires are assigned at random by computer in MotoGP. Tires are hand-picked by Pirelli techs in WSBK. It is rumored that there is a stack of tires at the back of the Pirelli truck that have been lying around for a couple of years. These are rumored to be kept for 'special supply' to riders at the whim of the tire supplier or organizer. I have never been able to get anyone to confirm this on the record.
Click to expand...



Silly question and apologies if this has been covered previously, but doest he highlighted section above mean that tyyres are serial numbered/coded?



Or does it mean that the computer will say 'select tyres 1 and 19 from pile a, tyre 4 and 22 from pile b etc;



Asking as I am genuinely wondering.
 
Gaz said:
Silly question and apologies if this has been covered previously, but doest he highlighted section above mean that tyyres are serial numbered/coded?



Or does it mean that the computer will say 'select tyres 1 and 19 from pile a, tyre 4 and 22 from pile b etc;



Asking as I am genuinely wondering.
Click to expand...



Before each weekend, the Technical Director prints out a pile of barcoded stickers, and applies them to the BS tires. He (well, his assistants actually) then scans all of the bar codes and enters them into his computer (I think they go in a spreadsheet). The computer then decides by random selection which bike will get which tires. For a discussion of the weakness of using computers to generate random numbers, start on the Wikipedia page and work you way forwards http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generation
 
Kropotkin said:
A good argument. But really, the heart of the matter is the definition of the word 'pinnacle'. People have their own ideas of what they mean by pinnacle, but use the word as if it was universally obvious what it means. But the highest mountain in the Netherlands is a pretty disappointing spectacle, yet that too is the 'pinnacle' of the Netherlands (who have to share it with Germany and Belgium, but that's just the way it is).
Click to expand...



Best riders, most importantly. Best bikes, preferably.



I think I've seen you repeatedly state your faith in that the motogp will always have the best riders. I wish I would share your optimism on this. "Alles kan stuk" (is there any good English expression for this?) is something I deeply believe in.



I believe if the bikes fall below SBK level technologically, it is uncertain if motogp will be able to maintain the best riders.
 
Kropotkin said:
A good argument. But really, the heart of the matter is the definition of the word 'pinnacle'. People have their own ideas of what they mean by pinnacle, but use the word as if it was universally obvious what it means. But the highest mountain in the Netherlands is a pretty disappointing spectacle, yet that too is the 'pinnacle' of the Netherlands (who have to share it with Germany and Belgium, but that's just the way it is).
Click to expand...

To add, of course there is no universally applicable definiton of the word 'pinnacle', it is almost by definiont subjective. But that is kind of the point, isn't it? Motogp has to appear to be the pinnacle to the fans and the riders.
 
Great thread.



Other than two posts of Talpa and Jumkie.



Talpa having a whinge at Stoner, and no other substance about the topic.



Jumkie having a whinge at Talpa and being the lord of the threads with his valuable contribution commenting/voting on only the posts or posters, As usual absolutely nothing about the topic, though he has put is a great disclaimer for his whinging ( he will comment later
<
<
)







Oh and I will comment later ......
<
<
<
<
 
stiefel said:
Best riders, most importantly. Best bikes, preferably.



I think I've seen you repeatedly state your faith in that the motogp will always have the best riders. I wish I would share your optimism on this. "Alles kan stuk" (is there any good English expression for this?) is something I deeply believe in.



I believe if the bikes fall below SBK level technologically, it is uncertain if motogp will be able to maintain the best riders.
Click to expand...





Always? I'm not sure. For the foreseeable future, definitely. It's a virtuous circle: MotoGP now unquestionably has the best riders on the planet. Every egomaniacal rider (and that's all of them) on the planet who wants to demonstrate that they are the best know they have to go to MotoGP to prove it. So they will do what they can to get there. As long as that is the case - and with Lorenzo currently riding there, Marquez on his way in, Vinales coming through, and Hanika hinting at being something very special, the odds are that this will continue to be the case for a long time - then the best riders will want to be in MotoGP.



What could happen is something like what happened during the Carl Fogarty era in World Superbikes. A rider comes up through national series and goes to WSBK and cleans up (a little like Spies did). He stays in WSBK instead of MotoGP, and beats the riders going from MotoGP to WSBK. Questions will be asked, and doubts will arise. I can't see anyone in a Superbike series at the moment with that alien level of talent ready to move up to WSBK, but that's also because I don't follow all of the national series closely enough to be sure. So it could still happen.
 
Foggy got his arse hand to him by lil John when he went back to Ducati because the Honda was evidently incapable of winning the title. First RC45 title went to the man everybody loved to hate from Little Rock Arkansas. Foggy was another Bayliss, great on the Duck in WSBK with 200 extra cc, but out of his depth with the big boys. Although at least Bayliss actually had the ball, (see what I did there?) to go to gp and prove he was the new Shinici Itoh. Foggyx last attempt at racing on the Cagiva was a joke, he was in the right place when Doohan skittled Schwantz, and ran 2nd til his "brakes gave him problems," surprisingly, just as Cadalora passed him, "then ran out of petrol" after MacKenzie passed him. Even his team boss questioned how he completed the slowing down lap with no petrol!

The next year he nearly wild carded again at Donny, but he did .... all on the Friday and said he wasn't racing so he could concentrate on WSBK. Foggy, Bayliss, Spies, Biaggi I could go on, WSBK does not come close to gp.
 
Thinking about this some more, I think we're generalizing the whole 'complaining' thing a bit too much. Come to think of it, I think I saw in one of the motomatters articles (not sure though, might have been somewhere else) a statement of wonder about how it is possible for Stoner to say at the one hand that the media shouldn't put down the sport so much and on the other hand launches a scathing attack on the sport himself in his resignation press conference. I'm pretty certain I've seen motomatters articles where David is critical of the racing in the past months. I've been making a case repeatedly on this forum against the excessive complaining against sport, yet I complain a-plenty myself.



Are we all schizo's?



Perhaps, but more importantly, I think we're talking about seperate issues. Some of us have taken issue with calling the racing boring but have criticised certain rule changes and the general direction of the sport. For others, it is the other way around, and for some a mixture of the above.
 
Talpa said:
Honda must be pissed then, all those new parts and Casey is riding slower straight into the sand pit or other riders again.



I guess that's a 'reverse' stand off then
Click to expand...



Are you actually able to convince yourself that Honda is so petty and short-sighted that they would cut of their nose to spite their face by sabotoging their chances of winning a championship into which they've invested who-knows-how-many millions of Euros?
 
Keshav said:
Are you actually able to convince yourself that Honda is so petty and short-sighted that they would cut of their nose to spite their face by sabotoging their chances of winning a championship into which they've invested who-knows-how-many millions of Euros?
Click to expand...



Twas tongue in cheek dude, my mistake and apologies, replying to Barry is borderline insane I know...........



Otherwise its a very good thread, I do agree with Steifel in a lot of ways, most of us here are complaining about the mismanagement of the series-particularly the regs. WSBK has its flaws too-but continues to produce great racing-so they are doing something right. IMO in a lot of ways the regs in Motogp also allow for a lot of excuses from riders/manufacturers and fans. Some of these excuses are probably well justified, and knowing what most semi-well-informed punters do about TC, GPS, Anti Wheelie, no off tyres etc. questions inevitably rise about the results we see, and those questions are usually centred around the point of most interest-the human factor......rider competition is key to the success of the sport, everything else should come second to this IMO, and unfortunately of recent years this hasn't really been the focal point.
 
basspete said:
Foggy got his arse hand to him by lil John when he went back to Ducati because the Honda was evidently incapable of winning the title. First RC45 title went to the man everybody loved to hate from Little Rock Arkansas. Foggy was another Bayliss, great on the Duck in WSBK with 200 extra cc, but out of his depth with the big boys. Although at least Bayliss actually had the ball, (see what I did there?) to go to gp and prove he was the new Shinici Itoh. Foggyx last attempt at racing on the Cagiva was a joke, he was in the right place when Doohan skittled Schwantz, and ran 2nd til his "brakes gave him problems," surprisingly, just as Cadalora passed him, "then ran out of petrol" after MacKenzie passed him. Even his team boss questioned how he completed the slowing down lap with no petrol!

The next year he nearly wild carded again at Donny, but he did .... all on the Friday and said he wasn't racing so he could concentrate on WSBK. Foggy, Bayliss, Spies, Biaggi I could go on, WSBK does not come close to gp.
Click to expand...



Actually not correct,Foggy won more races on the RC45 in one season than Slight and Polen did between them in two years even beating John at Assen,not bad going for a guy out of his depth,when John won the title there was a lot of wet races and even he admitted had it been dry Foggy would have been gone as the RC was a pig but John was a master in the wet,and Carl did finish forth in a grand prix on a Cagiva, i think your short changing the guy by saying he could only ride the Ducati go look at him on the island on a Yamaha,if your going to compare lets see how many of those GP boys broke lap record on the island,oh thats it NONE.
 
Arrabbiata1 said:
I think that Pov is referring to the compromising of a 'prototype' series with the emergence of proddie based engines to slash costs and the concern that the CRT model is the future of the sport. Production derived engines have been seen on the past in the sport but the bid to swell grid numbers via this route threatens to usurp the thoroughbred prototype which has become a hallmark of the series.



The demise of qualifiers is in my opinion a lost art. The change to all four stroke albeit not a recent switch was inevitable progress with road going two strokes inevitably superseded by the eco friendly four stroke counterparts - but the disappearance of the 500's marked the end of an elitist era. Moves are now afoot to ban carbon discs unless supplier costs can be vastly reduced which is unlikely.
Click to expand...



Povol also says that fans should only care about the competitive bikes at the front. His complaining about backmarkers is beyond me since CRTs are merely being RE-instated after the bunk contract between the FIM and FGSports.
 

Similar threads

T
Hi guys!
Replies
5
Views
581
#22
#22
#22
Top 10 MotoGP rider moves of the MotoGP era.
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
#22
#22
Segfault
Ducati Dream Team
Replies
9
Views
895
p4p1
P
M
MotoGP to Enact Stricter Concessions for 2024
Replies
18
Views
1K
mylexicon
M
M
Is KTM on the Brink of Withdrawal from MotoGP?
2 3
Replies
43
Views
2K
surendhar
S

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top